Andre de Ruyter’s brutally honest feedback on exposing politically-sponsored criminal activity at Eskom

Former Eskom CEO Andre de Ruyter said “naive patriotism” led him to apply for the toughest job in South Africa as he wanted to make a difference.

De Ruyter shared this information during a discussion organized by the Saïd Business School at the University of Oxford.

The discussion, led by MBA student May Manning, focused on his role as Eskom chief executive and moving from a fossil-fuel-powered world.

Manning asked De Ruyter why he decided to become Eskom CEO, considering the tremendous challenges associated with the position.

Before he took the helm, Eskom had eleven CEOs in ten years, and his predecessor left the office on a stretcher due to severe health issues.

“What it came down to is what possibly can be described as naive patriotism,” De Ruyter told Manning.

He said South Africans love to complain. If he didn’t take the opportunity to try and make a difference, he would have forfeited his right to complain.

“When I have this opportunity to become Eskom CEO, let me take it and try my best and see what happens,” he said.

He explained that transitioning from Nampak, which was a profit-driven organization, to Eskom, which had other mandates, was challenging.

“Basic business concepts, like calculating internal rates of return on projects and optimizing capital, were mostly foreign at Eskom,” he said.

“This is because procurement was seen as a transformation tool instead of a way to ensure the best solution was put in place.”

De Ruyter said that once you shift that focus, priorities become confused, and you lack the clarity of a private-sector company.

He added that the level of scrutiny as the Eskom CEO, including from the media and Parliament, was disruptive.

“It was quite an adjustment and revelation moving from essentially being your own boss in the private sector,” he said.

Exiting with explosive allegations about Eskom

Before De Ruyter stepped down as Eskom CEO, he made explosive allegations about corruption and political interference at the power utility.

He also published a book, Truth to Power: My Three Years Inside Eskom, which detailed the malfeasance at the company.

Commenting on this decision, De Ruyter said, looking back, it was the right decision to speak out about the problems at Eskom.

“I could have enjoyed all the farewell parties, received all the accolades, and joined a couple of boards,” he said.

“However, that would have been contrary to the value of integrity. I would have had to compromise.”

He said it would not have been the right thing to do to stay quiet, knowing of the criminal activity at Eskom, sponsored by politically connected actors.

“I had the luxury of tossing a hand grenade over my shoulder as I left the office. I was in a financial position which allowed me to do that,” he said.

“You have to think about that. You cannot be brave and foolish. You have to be brave and consider the consequences.”

He said, in hindsight, he believes that his disclosures moved the Overton window on what is acceptable to say in public in South Africa.

“Previously, there was a shroud of silence around politically connected involvement in criminal activity,” De Ruyter said.

“What is happening now is that more disclosures are coming out. The narrative is clearer that we have a significant problem with politically sponsored corruption.”

He said opening the window for this to happen is a worthy consequence of his explosive allegations upon leaving office.